Jump to content
BluePaul

The future of John Peel

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, stuartbert two hats said:

At least it gives West Holts a get out clause when the programme something other than jazz.

This might be stating the obvious but West Holts was Jazzworld which refers to jazz & world music not a 'world of jazz' music on the stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Johnnyseven said:

This might be stating the obvious but West Holts was Jazzworld which refers to jazz & world music not a 'world of jazz' music on the stage.

It's not stating the obvious, but what is pretty obvious is that whoever named Jazzworld and New Bands Tent seemed to have a talent for misleading names for stages.  I remember that it was Jazz/World, rather than Jazz world now you mention it, but I had completely forgotten the meaning of the name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rose-Colored Boy said:

I understand all that - obviously there’s a difference between being a predator in the 60s/70s/80s like Peel, Bowie, Steven Tyler, Jerry Lee Lewis and all the rest of them, and doing what Jimmy Saville and Ian Watkins did in the 21st Century. But it’s still unspeakably grim and something I’m surprised Glastonbury haven’t chosen to quietly move away from indirectly condoning.

from what Nal quoted above about Peel, it didn't sound like he was "a predator". It was the more like the girls were queuing up for him.

And that's fuck all like "what Jimmy Saville and Ian Watkins did". 

Edited by eFestivals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

I remember that it was Jazz/World, rather than Jazz world now you mention it

no, it was never Jazz/World in my memory. It was always 'Jazzworld'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

no, it was never Jazz/World in my memory. It was always 'Jazzworld'.

I was unclear - yes, it was always written as "Jazzworld", I was writing it out in a way to reflect it's meaning as described by @Johnnyseven, and made the whole thing more confusing in the process!

#susanalbumparty anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

from what Nal quoted above about Peel, it didn't sound like he was "a predator". It was the more like the girls were queuing up for him.

And that's fuck all like "what Jimmy Saville and Ian Watkins did". 

No defo not a predator like that but still, not great. 

Funny how society tolerated "bantz" like that up until very recently. He was openly talking about it right up to the 90s. 

Wyman ruined it for all those guys.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

no, it was never Jazz/World in my memory. It was always 'Jazzworld'.

Except the year that it was "OneWorld"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Nal said:

No defo not a predator like that but still, not great. 

Funny how society tolerated "bantz" like that up until very recently. He was openly talking about it right up to the 90s. 

Wyman ruined it for all those guys.

yuep, definitely wrong in today's terms. I'm simply pointing out that wasn't the case at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, incident said:

Except the year that it was "OneWorld"

That was 2003, I think. I liked that name the best

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

yuep, definitely wrong in today's terms. I'm simply pointing out that wasn't the case at the time.

I agree. Morality is an ever changing thing. There are many things that were perfectly acceptable in the 60's and 70's and 80's that would thankfully not be acceptable now. I do think it's a dangerous thing though to try and apply today's moral code to people's previous behaviour. I still remember Mandy Smith being deemed a gold digger rather than anything explicitly being said about Bill Wyman. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

from what Nal quoted above about Peel, it didn't sound like he was "a predator". It was the more like the girls were queuing up for him.

And that's fuck all like "what Jimmy Saville and Ian Watkins did". 

I disagree- sexually predatorial behaviour is about taking advantage of/exploiting people, not whether that person or those people want to have sex with the predator. In this case he took advantage of his power advantage both along lines of age and fame. Saville and Watkins took it to another level, but it was still predatorial behaviour. Often predators will find someone vulnerable and exploit that vulnerability to get what they want (where as most non-predatorial people see a vulnerable person and want to protect/avoid exploiting them).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep it as a tent for all the reasons already stated.   The field does need a few food traders if possible.   Also if the bars turn their music down a bit that would help. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

I only ever regret stepping in there.

Sharon Van Etten was good this year!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

I disagree- sexually predatorial behaviour is about taking advantage of/exploiting people, not whether that person or those people want to have sex with the predator. In this case he took advantage of his power advantage both along lines of age and fame. Saville and Watkins took it to another level, but it was still predatorial behaviour. Often predators will find someone vulnerable and exploit that vulnerability to get what they want (where as most non-predatorial people see a vulnerable person and want to protect/avoid exploiting them).

To me a predator hunts for its prey. From what I’ve seen JP did not hunt for it but accepted what was offered when he shouldn’t have 

it was a different time as Neil said. Our physics teacher got married to one of his pupils the week after she left school at 16. 

They stayed together until he died.

Don’t get me wrong I’m not condoning it, it just needs to be seen in context

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr.Tease said:

I disagree- sexually predatorial behaviour is about taking advantage of/exploiting people, not whether that person or those people want to have sex with the predator. In this case he took advantage of his power advantage both along lines of age and fame. Saville and Watkins took it to another level, but it was still predatorial behaviour. Often predators will find someone vulnerable and exploit that vulnerability to get what they want (where as most non-predatorial people see a vulnerable person and want to protect/avoid exploiting them).

 
the dictionary disagrees
 
Dictionary
 
 
 
 
 
 
predator
/ˈprɛdətə/
noun
  1. 1.
    an animal that naturally preys on others.
    "wolves are major predators of small mammals"
  2. 2.
    a person who ruthlessly exploits others.
    "a sexual predator"

Predators actively seek out their victims.

Staying put and having someone willingly visit without encouragement on their own agency is something different.

In today's terms the 2nd is an abusive power relationship, but it's not predatory. 

Edited by eFestivals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, eFestivals said:
 
the dictionary disagrees
 
Dictionary
 
 
 
 
 
 
predator
/ˈprɛdətə/
noun
  1. 1.
    an animal that naturally preys on others.
    "wolves are major predators of small mammals"
  2. 2.
    a person who ruthlessly exploits others.
    "a sexual predator"

Predators actively seek out their victims.

Staying put and having someone willingly visit without encouragement on their own agency is something different.

In today's terms the 2nd is an abusive power relationship, but it's not predatory. 

I work with survivors of childhood sexual abuse, and also sexual exploitation, today it counts as predatory behaviour, which I think it is to be honest. They were school children and he was a fully grown man. Don't think the 'they came on to him" as if he was powerless to refuse, works as a defence anymore.

He knew where the school girls were waiting and went up and interacted with them. And did it again and again. 

A lot of children who are sexually abused, go on to exhibit sexualised behaviour and can crack on to adults- that doesn't mean an adult accepting the advances of a child is anything other than exploitative and predatory- they are preying on the vulnerable.

I get why people find it tricky getting their heads round the new definitions, but I think the new definitions are for the best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good job those lads came in here to tell us what the dictionary definition of a pedo is, tackling the real issues there for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, GETOFFAMYLAWN said:

Good job those lads came in here to tell us what the dictionary definition of a pedo is, tackling the real issues there for sure.

Yeah, if they had a son or daughter who was 13-15 and they found out that a 20-25 year old adult had had sex with them (and who frequently slept with 13 to 15 year olds), I'm not sure their first thought would be "oh, well technically my child wasn't a pre-pubesent child" or "well, my child did crack on to them!"- they'd see it for what it it was, their child was exploited by a sexual predator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

I work with survivors of childhood sexual abuse, and also sexual exploitation, today it counts as predatory behaviour, which I think it is to be honest. They were school children and he was a fully grown man. Don't think the 'they came on to him" as if he was powerless to refuse, works as a defence anymore.

He knew where the school girls were waiting and went up and interacted with them. And did it again and again. 

A lot of children who are sexually abused, go on to exhibit sexualised behaviour and can crack on to adults- that doesn't mean an adult accepting the advances of a child is anything other than exploitative and predatory- they are preying on the vulnerable.

I get why people find it tricky getting their heads round the new definitions, but I think the new definitions are for the best.

I wholeheartedly agree with the modern definition. I am a father. What I don’t agree with is judging JP by those definitions. Would you want to be judged for your actions now by the moral code in 40 years time?  A lot happens in 40 years. Maybe eating the flesh of an animal will generally be seen as akin to child abuse by then. 

What he did was wrong but to label him as a predator?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

Yeah, if they had a son or daughter who was 13-15 and they found out that a 20-25 year old adult had had sex with them (and who frequently slept with 13 to 15 year olds), I'm not sure their first thought would be "oh, well technically my child wasn't a pre-pubesent child"

That reaction would probably be quite different from the reaction if their kid was 8 though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tarw said:

I wholeheartedly agree with the modern definition. I am a father. What I don’t agree with is judging JP by those definitions. Would you want to be judged for your actions now by the moral code in 40 years time?  A lot happens in 40 years. Maybe eating the flesh of an animal will generally be seen as akin to child abuse by then. 

What he did was wrong but to label him as a predator?

I can get the argument that predatorial behaviour back then was not only acceptable, but weirdly exulted (hence all the boasting), and that he probably didn't consider or see what he was doing was predatorial or understand the effects, but that doesn't mean it wasn't predatorial.

For me, it's not about judging him, but answering the question whether it's right to have a stage named after him- in the same way there's been debates about statues on university campuses etc. And also I never think it hurts to have discussion about sexual exploitation and predatorial behaviour and how it's defined and what it is, because it might make some people reflect on their behaviour or be more perceptive/vigilant of it if they encounter it.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

That reaction would probably be quite different from the reaction if their kid was 8 though. 

Wouldn't tho would it? If some dirty bastard has been preying on your child it wouldn't really make much odds whether they're past puberty or not, and it's creepy as fuck to suggest it would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...